Opinion Should the AFL introduce draft pick protection?

[Fatcat08]

Does anybody know about draft pick protection in the NFL?

Our Draft is more like the NFL than NBA.

Not really. There is such thing as a conditional pick however thats more based on the player they're trading for reaching certain milestones that mean the pick is actually traded. If they don't then it reverts back to the original team. Most of these sort of picks are 5-7th round picks and from my knowledge involve player trades, not just pick swaps.

 

[eastfreo75]

Not really. There is such thing as a conditional pick however thats more based on the player they're trading for reaching certain milestones that mean the pick is actually traded. If they don't then it reverts back to the original team. Most of these sort of picks are 5-7th round picks and from my knowledge involve player trades, not just pick swaps.

thanks.

 

[Cleric]

Its not unworkable because it does work in other spots.

You can work anything. To have it done fairly is another thing.

 

[Scotland]

I'm OK with provisions being applied. But it should work both ways.

We traded our first pick in the 2018 draft to Gold Coast in 2017. We had just snuck into 8th, lost in the semis and were tipped to slide.

Future 1st + pick 50 for future 2nd + picks 21, 26, 37. Huge win for us but in theory that's a 35 pick downgrade.

If we had offered a top 10 protected pick GC probably wouldn't done the deal or would have excluded 26 or 37.

But what if we had offered free choice of 2018 or 2019? Come October 2018 GC could have said 'your first pick is 18 prior to shenanigans, you keep that and we'll have 2019 thanks'.

 

[Obeanie1]

What if stocker actually was a superstar? Do Carlton still keep their pick?

I want to trade my future first for fife but I still want to keep the pick if we play sho1t next year.... makes sense.

Exactly. Stocker shows not alot in 2019, 5 years later wins Brownlow.

So do you reverse the pick protection then?

You make your bed you lay in it.

 

[footyfan1978]

Stupid idea. Why should one club that does the trade be forced to wait another year later? Makes no sense. The live trading is to allow a bit of gamble in the system. I quite like it as it is. Some trades going to be worth it in hindsight and others not. It is meant to be this way.

 

[eastfreo75]

Stupid idea. Why should one club that does the trade be forced to wait another year later? Makes no sense. The live trading is to allow a bit of gamble in the system. I quite like it as it is. Some trades going to be worth it in hindsight and others not. It is meant to be this way.

NBA has five players on the court with seven bench players.

AFL has 18 players on field with 4 players on the pine.

One player has more of impact in NBA than AFL.

Their is no need for protection.

Teams need to do a better job of viewing their lists.

 

[btdg]

I think worth pointing out is that in this case both teams got exactly what they wanted and gave up what they wanted. Pick protection is irrelevant and had it been included, Adelaide would not have accepted the trade and Carlton, by extension, would not have received Stocker.

I hate the trade from a Carlton perspective; but the club got what it wanted (2 picks instead of 1) and was happy to give up a likely bottom 3 pick.

Allowing pick protection would not have changed this trade at all. Pick protection is an option, not something compulsory...

 

[FyfeToAdelaide]

Stupid idea. Why should one club that does the trade be forced to wait another year later? Makes no sense. The live trading is to allow a bit of gamble in the system. I quite like it as it is. Some trades going to be worth it in hindsight and others not. It is meant to be this way.

These stipulations on protection are decided pre-deal so the club who has to w ait is well aware of that possibility.

Also people in here seem to be thinking the protection undoes the deal.. it doesn't and can sometimes work out better to miss it the first year and have it go to the next.

Say you trade a pick and it's top 10 protected 2020, top 5 2021, no protection 2022. If that team gets pick 10, 5 and then 1. You get pick 1 2022 and have probably gave up less value due to those protections.

Also that nets trade was even worse. They essentially gave up 5 1st round picks because they did pick swaps also. They couldn't trade consecutive 1st round picks in one trade. But they did a pick swap every second year. So Boston got the better of theirs or the nets picks. They got smart, rosier, brown, Tatum and traded one with Isaiah Thomas for kyrie.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You do realise finding a generational player in the NBA has a huge impact on a team? That’s half the reason why there are pick protections. This isn’t the case in the AFL.

Look at this years NBA draft where every team was tanking for Zion Williamson- this player is seen as a generational player.

The AFL is not like the NBA draft. 1 player makes a bit of a difference sure but it doesn’t transform a whole side.

I’ll say this if protection comes in it should only be top 2 protection and if it comes in the side keeping the pick pays a penalty the next year (maybe a 3rd round selection or something).

 

[Robertio]

It is more holistic than draft pick protection. List management then has to be looked at as well ie a club decides to trade out a number of their better players to 'rebuild' and get high draft picks for the next few years, they have essentially traded out their other valuable commodity for the purpose of garnering high picks. If the argument is to protect clubs from trading out possible high picks then they should be penalised in some way for trading out their better players which affects their final ladder position

That said, in Carlton's case it is impossible for them to argue (and from what I am seeing they are not arguing) that they were blindsided in this trade considering they knew exactly where their list was at and had also decided to trade out mature age draft concessions in the same draft period for yet more draft picks. SOS himself had also argued what if Carlton finish above Adelaide. It really is a case of making a bed and then having to lay in it and that is how it should be

Yep, spot on the years not over yet but Carlton gambled and done the trade. If Adelaide win the flag and get pick one so be it.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Funny you should mention the lotto seeing as the NBA has a draft lottery in order to prevent tanking.

Not like it's worked, most people believe the Knicks tanked this year for better odds. And they didn't win the lottery anyway, so there was still tanking but less equalisation.

 

[blitzer]

I'm totally against pick protection. Its just a horrible idea.

Clubs make lots of decisions and they should live and die by those decisions.

Whilst I do take a certain amount of amusement out of Carlton's trade, the truth is even if it was Essendon I would still say bad luck, you made your decision and need to live with the consequences just like everyone else.

 

[Tim H]

Of course is different Australia driver drive on right hand side American driver drive on the left hand side.

I think you got that arse about.

 

[soreplums]

I’d rather be able to trade future picks other than the following year

 

[MowShow]

Seems a lot of people in here don't understand how pick protection in trading works.

It is not a compulsory safety net in place, it is negotiated and agreed to as part of the deal (and if both teams agree on no protection then no protection is applied). People saying it would ruin deals like the Adelaide/Carlton deal (and that Adelaide wouldn't accept) - if that's the case, Adelaide would insist on no pick protection and Carlton would still make the same deal.

There's almost no reason not to have this option available IMO as it shouldn't negatively impact any deals and actually makes teams more flexible with their offerings.

 

[citizen-erased]

It's hard to compare the NBA to the AFL - A top 10 pick is more highly rated in basketball as well as being more valuable, as one player makes a bigger difference in a five a side team, as compared to the AFL which has 22 players on the field.

With the exception of the above, i would be all for this idea.
It would mean both parties are factoring the protection in anyway, so its not like a team is being duped. And may see more pick trades from the lower teams occur, getting them off the bottom of the ladder sooner.

 

[Scotland]

Seems a lot of people in here don't understand how pick protection in trading works.

It is not a compulsory safety net in place, it is negotiated and agreed to as part of the deal (and if both teams agree on no protection then no protection is applied). People saying it would ruin deals like the Adelaide/Carlton deal (and that Adelaide wouldn't accept) - if that's the case, Adelaide would insist on no pick protection and Carlton would still make the same deal.

There's almost no reason not to have this option available IMO as it shouldn't negatively impact any deals and actually makes teams more flexible with their offerings.

E.g.

Brad Hill -> Haw
2020 Rd 1 -> Freo

You could make that top 10 protected or not at the time of trade. It's just a mechanism to try and give a pick between 10 and 18.

 

[Scotland]

Also protected picks don't work if you can only trade one year in advance. You'd have to be able to offer a protected pick and then the next year's pick in lieu of that. Etc.

What could work is conditional trades/swaps.

E.g. We'll give you our Rd 1 pick for next year if it's between 10 and 18. If it's between 1 and 10 you have to give us your Rd 2 pick. Etc.

 

[Peel67skin]

Seems a lot of people in here don't understand how pick protection in trading works.

It is not a compulsory safety net in place, it is negotiated and agreed to as part of the deal (and if both teams agree on no protection then no protection is applied). People saying it would ruin deals like the Adelaide/Carlton deal (and that Adelaide wouldn't accept) - if that's the case, Adelaide would insist on no pick protection and Carlton would still make the same deal.

There's almost no reason not to have this option available IMO as it shouldn't negatively impact any deals and actually makes teams more flexible with their offerings.

I do hope you mention it in your first post, maybe optional. Draft pick protection as title.

 

[CrazyJoeFevola]

Nah. Live by the sword die by it etc.

 

[4THAWN]

Short answer for draft pick protection, no. As other posters have mentioned, theres a massive difference between missing out on Lebron James when you're a struggling team and missing out on Noah Anderson when you're a struggling team.

Draft pick protection is a safety net for long-term F*k ups like the Brooklyn Nets, not shorter term list management faults like Carlton.

Lets say theres a world where you can trade picks from 3 years in advance e.g.at the end of this year Carlton can trade 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 draft picks.

Carlton trades 2019, 2020, 2022 1st rounders, 2020, 2021, 2020 2nd rounders for Lance Franklin, Isaac Heney, Josh Kennedy, Callum Sinclair and Sam Reid.

Buddy can't get his body right, kennedy slows down, heeney sinclair reid kennedy and cripps aren't enough to drag carlton out of the bottom 4.

Now Carlton are stuck with aging stars and have traded away their medium-long term draft prosperity.

This is the type of scenario that Draft Pick Protection would fix, but this scenario can't exist within the current rules.